| Literature DB >> 24260066 |
Zhihong Weng1, Judith Ertle, Shaoping Zheng, Thomas Lauenstein, Stefan Mueller, Andreas Bockisch, Guido Gerken, Dongliang Yang, Joerg F Schlaak.
Abstract
In this study, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), modified RECIST (mRECIST), Choi and modified Choi criteria were compared to determine which method is optimal for response evaluation in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients treated with transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with yttrium-90 microspheres. Responses were evaluated by RECIST, mRECIST, Choi and modified Choi criteria in 113 patients with HCC undergoing TARE. Results were compared at 12 weeks after therapy. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and Cox regression were used to assess differences in time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) between the responders and non-responders defined by each method. The results demonstrated that the responders and non-responders defined by mRECIST and Choi criteria successfully identified patients with a long TTP (400 and 280 days) or short TTP (188 and 166 days) (P=0.004 and 0.002, respectively). Neither RECIST nor modified Choi criteria discriminated between patients who had a short or long clinical benefit. Cox regression analysis revealed that Choi response was a prognostic factor of OS (P=0.004) and was associated with a 53% risk reduction. There was no significant association between survival and RECIST, mRECIST and modified Choi responses. In conclusion, tumor response according to Choi criteria may be helpful to define early HCC patients who benefit from TARE. RECIST, mRECIST and modified Choi appeared inferior.Entities:
Keywords: Choi criteria; RECIST; hepatocellular carcinoma; mRECIST; transarterial radioembolization; tumor response
Year: 2013 PMID: 24260066 PMCID: PMC3834326 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2013.1612
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Definition of target radiological responses.
| Response | RECIST 1.1 | mRECIST | Choi criteria | Modified Choi criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CR | Disappearance of all target lesions | Disappearance of any intratumoral arterial enhancement in all target lesions | Disappearance of all target lesions | Disappearance of all target lesions |
| PR | At least a 30% decrease in the sum of the greatest unidimensional diameters of target lesions | At least a 30% decrease in the sum of unidimensional diameters of viable target lesions | Decrease in tumor size ≥10% or decrease in tumor density ≥15% on CT | Decrease in tumor size ≥10% and decrease in tumor density ≥15% on CT |
| SD | Any cases that do not qualify for either partial response or progressive disease | Any cases that do not qualify for either partial response or progressive disease | Does not meet the criteria for CR, PR or PD | Does not meet the criteria for CR, PR or PD |
| PD | An increase of at least 20% in the sum of the diameters of target lesions | An increase of at least 20% in the sum of the diameters of viable target lesions | Increase in tumor size ≥10% and does not meet PR criteria by tumor density | Increase in tumor size ≥10% and does not meet PR criteria by tumor density |
CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; CT, computed tomography.
Figure 1OS in the whole series. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to show the OS of all HCC patients following TARE. OS, overall survival; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; TARE, transarterial radioembolization.
Figure 2Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to compare TTP and OS between responders and non-responders according to four radiological assessment methods. HCC patients undergoing TARE had radiological responses, as evaluated by four criteria: (A and E) RECIST, (B and F) mRECIST, (C and G) Choi and (D and H) modified Choi, performed 12 weeks post-TARE. TTP and OS were compared between responders and non-responders, according to the different criteria. TTP, time to progression; OS, overall survival; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; TARE, transarterial radioembolization; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; mRECIST, modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors.
Responses according to RECIST, mRECIST, Choi and modified Choi criteria and association with TTP and OS.
| TTP | OS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Response criteria | Responders | Non-responders | P-value | Responders | Non-responders | P-value |
| RECIST | 330 (207–453) | 203 (146–260) | 0.270 | 400 (259–541) | 431 (241–621) | 0.965 |
| mRECIST | 400 (273–527) | 188 (164–212) | 0.004 | 621 (278–964) | 332 (192–472) | 0.077 |
| Choi | 280 (191–369) | 166 (129–203) | 0.002 | 442 (250–634) | 247 (123–371) | 0.003 |
| Modified Choi | 294 (179–409) | 197 (148–246) | 0.072 | 449 (271–627) | 311 (231–391) | 0.069 |
Median number of days with 95% CIs.
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; mRECIST, modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; TTP, time to progression; OS, overall survival.
Cox regression was generated to compare TTP and OS between responders and non-responders according to the four response criteria.
| TTP | OS | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||
| Response criteria | n | HR (95% CI) | P-value | HR (95% CI) | P-value |
| RECIST | |||||
| Responders | 25 | 0.74 (0.43–1.27) | 0.274 | 0.99 (0.58–1.70) | 0.965 |
| Non-responders | 88 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||
| mRECIST | |||||
| Responders | 29 | 0.42 (0.24–0.74) | 0.003 | 0.61 (0.35–1.06) | 0.080 |
| Non-responders | 84 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||
| Choi | |||||
| Responders | 88 | 0.46 (0.28–0.77) | 0.003 | 0.47 (0.28–0.78) | 0.004 |
| Non-responders | 25 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||
| Modified Choi | |||||
| Responders | 40 | 0.64 (0.40–1.05) | 0.075 | 0.64 (0.39–1.04) | 0.072 |
| Non-responders | 73 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||
RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; mRECIST, modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; TTP, time to progression; OS, overall survival; HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Patient baseline demographics and tumor characteristics.
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Age, years | 69 [19–88] |
| Male | 90 (80) |
| Etiology of HCC | |
| HCV | 18 (16) |
| HBV | 17 (15) |
| HBV + HCV | 8 (7) |
| NASH | 35 (31) |
| Other | 12 (11) |
| Cryptogenic | 23 (20) |
| MELD score | 8 [6–26] |
| Bilirubin, mg/dl | 0.7 [0.2–4.9] |
| INR | 1.05 [0.88–2.76] |
| Creatinine, mg/dl | 0.99 [0.66–8.00] |
| ALT, U/l | 44 [13–285] |
| AST, U/l | 53 [17–299] |
| Cirrhosis | 54 (48) |
| AFP, U/ml | 54.0 [0.8–55791.0] |
| Number of lesions | |
| 1 | 56 (50) |
| 2–5 | 35 (31) |
| >5 | 22 (19) |
| Size of the largest lesion, cm | |
| ≤3 | 16 (14) |
| 3–5 | 33 (29) |
| 5–10 | 45 (40) |
| >10 | 19 (17) |
Data are presented as N (%) or median [interquartile range]. HBV, hepatitis B virus; HCV, hepatitis C virus; NASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; MELD, model for end-stage liver disease; INR, international normalized ratio; ALT, alanine transaminase; AST, aspartate transaminase; AFP, α-fetoprotein.